10 Teams Banned from 2013 March Madness

10 Men's Basketball programs failed to meet the required APR score of 900 to partcipate in the postseason, with the headliner being UConn that had a lot of players leave school for various legal troubles.

It seems doubtful this will necessarily change anything moving forward since Kentucky Basketball somehow got a score of 963 even though their entire team change every year.

Comment viewing options

They need to change college bball to imitate college football. Either make it so they have to stay 3 years or make it so they can leave straight from HS again. What is the point for these 1 and done kids to even go to college for one year from an academic standpoint?

No. $$$$$$$$ for the NBA. They one-year-in-college rule is entirely theirs, and it is entirely up to them to change it.

Back before the rule was implemented, players with no interest in college were going directly to the NBA. This was hurting the NBA, as the draft was losing interest thanks to most of the high draft picks being players a non-junky had never seen before, and then they took a few years to develop at the expense of the team. Enter the one-year rule, and suddenly the NBA is getting free player marketing and development at the expense of the NCAA. And it's not like the NBA cares if it makes a mockery of the NCAA "student" athlete, as long as it helps the bottom line.

College football doesn't have this problem because the NFL rule is three years, not one. I don't think most NBA players need as much physical development as NFL players though, so I don't know if the NBA is going to be in a hurry to change it. But it's entirely out ot the NCAA's hands.

OK, but UK is really anomalous, right? I mean, how many players leave early for the draft every year, 30 or so? 40? Across all of the teams, that's not that many. So for 99 percent of teams, it's a good metric.

Also, does UK recruit kids who don't want a degree? Or do they recruit kids who are really fucking good at basketball and are able to go pro?

So you're suggesting no schools should recruit the best highschool players in the country because they will likely go to the NBA before graduation?

That doesn't make sense. You can't penalize a school for getting good recruits. Aslong as the recruits are academically eligible/leave the school in good standing that should be enough. Why should KU be penalized for being able to recruit top notch talent?

I think the concern with these "one-and-done" kids and the APR stems from the very real possibility that if you only expect the kid to stay for 1 year, you can put them in easier classes and/or play around with their transripts (through various means) to make sure they remain eligible despite violating the true meaning and point of the APR system. I'm not accusing Kentucky of anything, and college sports in general are certainly not paragons of virtue, but it doesn't take a much cynicism to wonder how a team like Kentucky can recruit some of the best kids in the country every year, have them go pro, and maintain an APR that is only 8 points lower than Vanderbilts and higher than Georgetown, VCU, and OSU, amongst others.

I'm sorry do you know him personally or do you judge on the media portrayal of the man? I go to grad school with his daughter and met him personally and I can assure you he is anything but a sleezebag. Top players play for him because they relate to him and his tough background. He may toe the line but so do 95% of division 1 coaches. He's just more successful than the rest of them.

That's all well and good that you've met him in real life, that doesn't mean he isn't sleazy. Lots of sleezeballs - coaches, politicians, loan officers - seem like great people in real life. That's what allows them to be a sleezeball.

Edit: I'm not in any way, shape, or form comparing skirting rather arbitrary NCAA rules with what Sandusky did. I'm just agreeing with WolvinLA2's point that "Lots of sleezeballs ....seem like great people in real life."

Go ask Minutemen and Memphis Tigers fans about how upstanding and trustworthy coach Cal is. His daughter may be great, but it doesn't take away from the fact that, as a basketball coach, he embodies many of the deepest flaws of the sport.

And stop with the whole "he's like every other coach, just more successful" crap. He's won ONE championship. I don't particularly like Coach K, but he's won 4 championships, and his teams seem largely clean. Izzo has a title and at least as successful a run as Calipari, and people would say he's run a good, clean ship at MSU. Heck, I don't really like Roy Williams and think he is pretty sleazy, and he's got two titles to his name. So yeah, Calipari has recruited well and finally won a title last year, but he has certainly not been a runaway success given the trail of major infractions that have followed him, and on the court his teams are usually good but certainly not juggernauts (excluding last year's team to an extent).

They should probably tighten the rules to penalize programs that load up on one-and-dones, though. Even if these guys are leaving in good academic standing, they're leaving nowhere near a degree. Maybe a school should be penalized, say, .75 points for a guy who leaves after one year, .50 for one who leaves after two years and .25 for leaving after three.